Author Topic: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application  (Read 689392 times)

Online nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 145
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #120 on: 11/22/2008 04:50 AM »
Surely that is just a conformation that E=mc**2 .

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1956
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #121 on: 11/22/2008 01:52 PM »
Lampyridae:

You and Karl might find the following article from NewScientist of some interest entitled: "It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations"

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html?full=true&print=true

Since matter appears to be just self-contaiend vacuum-fluctuations smoke rings that make up the proton's quarks & gluons as well the electrons, then artifically affecting these elements by externally applied E&M fields as proposed in the MLT and QVF/MHD thruster devices becomes much less of a reach don't you think?   

An isolated proton is not a vacuum state, hence, it is not a vacuum fluctuation. It does provide evidence for quantum chromodynamics (QCD) (the theory with quarks and all forces but gravity in it) which does have vacuum fluctuations. And even if vacuum fluctuations exist (which I consider very likely), doesn't mean we can exploit it for a propulsion technology. The MLT (Mach Lorentz Thruster for those who haven't been keeping up) is pushing back and forth a capacitor whose inertia we can control via charging and discharging the capacitor. In other words, the capacitor's inertia fluctuates, but in a way we control.

The QVF/MWD (Quantum Vacuum Fluctuation/MagnetoHydroDynamics) thruster is attempting to do the same (as far as I can tell) for a patch of fluctuating vacuum for which we do not control the "fluctuation". Even attempting to observe the vacuum (in order to figure out whether to push or pull, let's say) will change to some degree the state of the vacuum. I just don't see the mechanism for generating a predictable, consistent thrust in a particular direction.
« Last Edit: 11/22/2008 01:54 PM by khallow »
Karl Hallowell

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 121
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #122 on: 11/27/2008 12:28 AM »
Lampyridae:

You and Karl might find the following article from NewScientist of some interest entitled: "It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations"

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html?full=true&print=true

Since matter appears to be just self-contaiend vacuum-fluctuations smoke rings that make up the proton's quarks & gluons as well the electrons, then artifically affecting these elements by externally applied E&M fields as proposed in the MLT and QVF/MHD thruster devices becomes much less of a reach don't you think?   

An isolated proton is not a vacuum state, hence, it is not a vacuum fluctuation. It does provide evidence for quantum chromodynamics (QCD) (the theory with quarks and all forces but gravity in it) which does have vacuum fluctuations. And even if vacuum fluctuations exist (which I consider very likely), doesn't mean we can exploit it for a propulsion technology. The MLT (Mach Lorentz Thruster for those who haven't been keeping up) is pushing back and forth a capacitor whose inertia we can control via charging and discharging the capacitor. In other words, the capacitor's inertia fluctuates, but in a way we control.

The QVF/MWD (Quantum Vacuum Fluctuation/MagnetoHydroDynamics) thruster is attempting to do the same (as far as I can tell) for a patch of fluctuating vacuum for which we do not control the "fluctuation". Even attempting to observe the vacuum (in order to figure out whether to push or pull, let's say) will change to some degree the state of the vacuum. I just don't see the mechanism for generating a predictable, consistent thrust in a particular direction.


Yet we *are* observing the vacuum, at a macroscopic state, because mass is real and not virtual. Somehow, all the quantum vacuum fluctuations even out and we don't live in a bubbling mass of quantum soda.
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 121
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #123 on: 11/27/2008 01:33 AM »
Surely that is just a conformation that E=mc**2 .

True, but it seems that matter is closer to energy than we would have thought. And that there seems to be a clearer link between energy and gravity, not just some unexplained space-time distortion in the presence of matter or energy. I'm keen to see where this research goes.
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1956
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #124 on: 11/27/2008 03:09 AM »

Yet we *are* observing the vacuum, at a macroscopic state, because mass is real and not virtual. Somehow, all the quantum vacuum fluctuations even out and we don't live in a bubbling mass of quantum soda.

The point of the computation was to demonstrate that the "standard model" does a decent job of approximating the mass of a proton. As I see it, we can't go from the model to claiming there's an exploitable fluctuation in the vacuum state. It's something like claiming you have some algorithm for consistently making money from the stock market based solely on the observation that prices on the stock market fluctuate. It could be true, but I'd like to see what mechanism is going to make that work out.

Surely that is just a conformation that E=mc**2 .

True, but it seems that matter is closer to energy than we would have thought. And that there seems to be a clearer link between energy and gravity, not just some unexplained space-time distortion in the presence of matter or energy. I'm keen to see where this research goes.

General relativity has a very close relationship between mass and energy, and between those two and the curvature of spacetime. The Einstein field equations equate an expression of the curvature of space and the cosmological constant with the stress-energy tensor which describes the mass and energy flow of the system.

I think even when we come up with accurate theories that incorporate the four forces (and perhaps other phenomena manifesting at energies beyond what we currently can observe), we still have a general relativity approximation (since general relativity works pretty well on the cosmological scale). So whatever's in the greater theory will reduce (once aspects like electromagnetism are negligiable or perhaps somehow encapsulated) to curvature, cosmological constant, or the stress-energy tensor. That should in itself imply the deep relationships between mass and energy you note, Lampyridae.
Karl Hallowell

Offline MTKeshe

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #125 on: 11/28/2008 11:22 AM »
If one uses matter, or anti-matter  for motion in propellantless field propulsion systems in atmospheric condition or space condition,  would  one be able to measure the  thrust created by the system or no , as one can do in rocket technology?

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 121
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #126 on: 12/03/2008 01:25 AM »
I take it you mean an accelerometer. It depends on the nature of the propellantless propulsion device. The MLT is a kind of rocket thruster using Far-Off Active Mass as "propellant." Therefore acceleration would be felt as normal, and without issues like intense vibrations and so on. Gravity-based drives for example wouldn't produce noticeable acceleration in the craft as it would be "falling" wherever its artificial gravity well pointed.
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #127 on: 12/13/2008 11:24 PM »
Well, with the rumblings in the beltway, I think that may be the case. Fingers crossed. I'm sure the DoD is quietly conducting its own experiments on this, but you can rest assured they won't be for public consumption. :P

Star-Drive, is there a diagram available illustrating how the QVF thruster works, or a design?

At the moment, I'm just guessing at how this all fits together. I'm just digesting stuff on vacuum energy and pair production (oh how shallow my physics knowledge is...). But the e/p pairs do have an influence thanks to vacuum polarisation. What purpose does the 100 MHz RF generator therefore have? How does it set up phonons in the e/p plasma? I gather it would pull them apart and make them dipoles for a little bit longer before they annihilate.

What is the current state of experiments with the MLT? Been off this forum for a while, too busy with business.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1956
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #128 on: 12/14/2008 08:50 AM »
I take it you mean an accelerometer. It depends on the nature of the propellantless propulsion device. The MLT is a kind of rocket thruster using Far-Off Active Mass as "propellant." Therefore acceleration would be felt as normal, and without issues like intense vibrations and so on. Gravity-based drives for example wouldn't produce noticeable acceleration in the craft as it would be "falling" wherever its artificial gravity well pointed.

Still it'll push on anything attached to it like a lever arm or cable. So you should be able to measure the thrust even if apparent acceleration is different.
Karl Hallowell

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1956
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #129 on: 02/27/2009 07:39 AM »
Star-Drive, is there any way to access the preprint listed in this conference?
Karl Hallowell

Offline cgrunska

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 246
  • Austin Tx
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #130 on: 02/27/2009 11:49 PM »
I barely understand anything you're writing Star-Drive, but it sounds friggin sweet. On the order, or above that of Dr. Bussard and his fusion plant!

Lets hope these things aren't just sci-fi

Offline GI-Thruster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 732
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #131 on: 02/28/2009 07:00 AM »
If I may add to what Paul is saying when he pens:

"The big problem here is just that very few people in the world have gone down this particular General Relativity rabbit trail. . ."

I have to concur.  There are relatively few theoretical physicists who have caught on to what Jim Woodward did when he brought Einstein and Mach together--that was a piece of genius we'll be looking back on for centuries much as we do with Lorentz, Maxwell and so many others who brought us an understanding of electromagnetism and all the tech that comes from this.

But why I'm posting again after several months away. . .anyone wanting a fuller understanding of the historical basis for what we're doing in gravinertial engineering will find this work invaluable:

http://www.amazon.com/Machs-Principle-Newtons-Quantum-Einstein/dp/0817638237/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235806860&sr=8-1

I highly recommend all of chapter 3 and especially Barbour's  "General Relativity as a Perfectly Machian Theory".  Obviously, Jim Woodward is not the only physicist who understands the relevance of Mach's Principle but he's the guy that made this apprehensible and an obtainable technology.

We have evidence, folks.  This is real and happening.
« Last Edit: 02/28/2009 07:30 AM by GI-Thruster »

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #132 on: 02/28/2009 05:04 PM »
Dr. James F. Woodward has recently completed a series of rotary based experiments designed to test his Mach-Effect (M-E) Conjecture--that when a capacitor dielectric's mass is driven by a time varying electromagnetic (E&M) power flux, while simultaneously undergoing bulk acceleration relative to the distant stars; that this will give rise to Mach Effects, or the temporary fluctuation of relativistic mass. 


Does Woodward's work relate at all to the work of the late TT Brown?

Using relativity to change the reaction mass through the cycle is the key to making this work, this is something I've known for over a decade. One question I've always had was whether it was possible to have mass-changing relativistic effects at much lower speeds by using, for instance, a fluid dynamic model, in which the speed of light within the fluid is very slow, and thus generate the impulse from using a hydraulic model with a fluid as the working mass.

I designed and built a prototype to test this a long while back but did not have the lab facilities to test it properly.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline GI-Thruster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 732
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #133 on: 02/28/2009 05:55 PM »
I don't think Dr. Woodward's work has anything to do with Brown and he'd probably be the first to tell you he has no confidence in Brown's work for several reasons.

On the issue of relativistic mass, Dr. Woodward's thrusters and rotators do not generate relativistic speeds in the dielectric.  The term "relativistic mass" is really only used to point out that his theory does not state that fluctuations in rest mass can be achieved.  Fluctuating rest mass would indeed make the universe an unsafe place.  Rather, his theory shows us how to temporarily fluctuate the entire energy state of mass, as per wiki's explanantion:

"The term relativistic mass is also used, and this is the total quantity of energy in a body or system (divided by c2). The relativistic mass (of a body or system of bodies) includes a contribution from the kinetic energy of the body, and is larger the faster the body moves, so unlike the invariant mass, the relativistic mass depends on the observer's frame of reference. However, for given single frames of reference and for closed systems, the relativistic mass is also a conserved quantity.

Because the relativistic mass is proportional to the energy, it has gradually fallen into disuse in among physicists[1]. There is disagreement over whether the concept remains pedagogically useful.[2][3]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_mass

In our case, drawing this distinction between rest or invarient mass and relativistic mass is a useful one because it sets aside objections physicists might otherwise rightly raise, that rest mass is indeed invarient and cannot be fluctuated.  Hope that helps.
« Last Edit: 02/28/2009 06:07 PM by GI-Thruster »

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #134 on: 03/02/2009 01:55 AM »
I don't think Dr. Woodward's work has anything to do with Brown and he'd probably be the first to tell you he has no confidence in Brown's work for several reasons.

I know Woodward was primarily trying to come up with a scenario where a Dean Drive type model would actually work and not be neutralized by simple newtonian physics. The key of course is as he has used mach's principle.

The reason Brown's work came to mind is due to his work on high energy/voltage capacitors, the Biefeld Brown Effect, and associated patents.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 121
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #135 on: 03/02/2009 11:41 PM »
GI-thruster, I believe Robert Forward came up with a "reactionless drive" using relativistic mass, but to get anything useful out of required using something akin to neutronium IIRC.
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Offline GI-Thruster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 732
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #136 on: 03/03/2009 07:37 PM »
Robert Forward did have a scheme for reactionless thrust but I believe it required an amount of constant, negative mass.  Woodward's thruster may make use of negative mass though only through temporary fluctuation.  If the fluctuation is > 100%, then the mass will go negative during its fluctuation but this is not required for his thrusters.  Both the MLT and UFG have apparently produced thrust without going to a dm>m condition however, we believe that a much greater thrust efficiency can be had by crossing this "wormhole boundary" of achieving a dm>m condition.  In fact, both Paul's MLT from several years ago and his current work are in "wormhole territory" where if no new conditions exist for mass fluctuation, we should see very large thrusts compared to what we should have with the more mundane dm<m conditions Woodward has till now been driving.

Offline Herb Schaltegger

Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #137 on: 03/03/2009 08:07 PM »
I see lots of handwaving and damned little math in this thread.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline GI-Thruster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 732
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #138 on: 03/03/2009 09:56 PM »
We're waving because we're all friends here. If you want to get up to speed just on the issue of Dr. Woodward's work, you can click the links posted about it on 7/6/8, 7/7/8, 9/17/8, 9/26/8 and 2/28/9.

Good luck!
« Last Edit: 03/03/2009 10:16 PM by GI-Thruster »

Offline mboeller

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #139 on: 03/04/2009 01:10 PM »
Dear Star Drive;

Thank you very much for your update. If I understand you correct the data-to-noise ratio of the latest tests showed a dB-ratio of ~10dB or 10-to-1. This is IMHO fantastic news. With such a large data-to-noise ratio the viability of the theory, the experiments and therefore the MLT thrusters is IMHO nearly a given.

On the other side the Newton/Watt ratio of 0,1 Ė 10 Newton / Watt you talk about seems rather extreme. :) I hope these values are not too good to be true. According to a PDF I read a few days ago a normal Toyota Corolla needs around 500 Newton to overcome the drag (body + wheels) at 100kmh (~ 62mph). The car engine needs ~13,5 KW of power for that. On the other side a highly efficient MLT would need only 50 Watts for the same task. So a MLT could be up to 270 times more efficient as a normal car engine which drives the wheels. Thatís astounding.
I really hope that the calculations about the very high efficiency of the MLTís are correct because this would open a complete new world regarding everything transportation, starting with simple pedal powered vehicles up to behemoth star cruisers. But I fear that it could not be so because it sounds too good to be true. 

Kind regards

Manfred

Tags: